Every vocal atheist gets accused of "smugness" at some point, but Maher really earns the word (though not because of his atheism -- all else being equal, I highly doubt he'd be any humbler as a religious person). I'm an atheist, too, and I would (and sometimes do) even say that religion at this point has a net negative effect on human civilization. Maher seems to agree, but rather than address the inherent problems, he seems more interested in making fun of loonies, or anybody he can manage to paint as such. This might even be O.K. if it had anything to do with consciousness-raising, but I don't see any of that here. And I'm basing this opinion not on the trailer for
Religulous (which is painful, but as with any trailer could be misrepresentative) but on his increasingly lunatic rants on the subject. Anyone who thinks Richard Dawkins' approach is arrogant should take a look at his appearance on Maher's show, as it really puts them both into perspective.
And then there's this...
Highway 61 wrote:What irks me is that Mahr may be an atheist, but he is an incredibly superstitious person. His fervor about the ineffectiveness of medicine and his stupid belief that because he eats well he is immune to all illness is just as laughable as any creationist's denial of evolution. His recent freak out at Bob Costas on the issue is probably funnier than anything in this film.
...which is absolutely spot-on. If you're going to address religious nonsense and call yourself a rationalist (as Maher has called himself) you need to be consistent about it. The scientific method is either valid or it isn't. You can't point and laugh at people who deny evidence about one thing and then turn around and deny other evidence obtained by the very same methods. That's exactly the kind of willful, obstinate ignorance boasted by the people Maher is getting such a kick out of making fun of. You also can't say that medical science is unsound because drug companies are corrupt any more than you can say atheism is evil because Stalin was a murderous, amoral dictator.
There's absolutely no reason religion, even the very core of it, can't or shouldn't be lampooned or ridiculed, but Maher just isn't good at it or right for it. Watching him try only makes me wish all the more that our country still had the capacity to produce an Ambrose Bierce or a Mark Twain in the era of mass media.
Far less significant to me, but no less bothersome given my proclivities: if he really wants to pronounce "Religulous" with a soft G, it needs to be spelled "Relig
iulous." I can't look at the word "Religulous" and not pronounce it with a hard G. And in any case, it's a really terrible title. But I'm a huge Lewis Carroll fan, so I have high standards for portmanteau words.
